System and method of notifying mobile devices to complete transactions

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9992194
  • Patent Number
    9,992,194
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, November 29, 2016
    7 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, June 5, 2018
    6 years ago
Abstract
A method including registering an authority device for an account on an auth platform; receiving transaction request from an initiator to the auth platform; messaging the authority device with the transaction request; receiving an authority agent response from the authority device to the auth platform; if the authority agent response confirms the transaction, communicating a confirmed transaction to the initiator; and if the authority agent response denies the transaction, communicating a denied transaction to the initiator.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates generally to the digital security services field, and more specifically to a new and useful system and method of notifying mobile devices to complete transactions in the digital security field.


BACKGROUND

Fraudulent transactions, whether executed online by a malicious party who has stolen a user's online banking password or offline by a malicious party entering a restricted building using a forged identification card, are indicators of a lack of authentication in present day security systems. Similarly, authorization (permission to complete a transaction) is limited without a strong notion of authentication. Traditionally, techniques for authentication are classified into several broad classes such as “what you know” (e.g., passwords or a social security number), “what you have” (e.g., physical possessions such as ATM cards or a security dongle), and “what you are” (e.g., biometric information such as a finger print or DNA). However, many of these solutions are burdensome to users, requiring the user to remember information or carry extra devices to complete a transaction. Thus, there is a need in the digital security services field to create a new and useful system and method of notifying mobile devices to complete transactions. This invention provides such a new and useful system and method.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES


FIGS. 1 and 2 are schematic representations of a method of a preferred embodiment for authenticating a transaction;



FIG. 3 is a schematic representation of a method of a preferred embodiment for authorizing a transaction;



FIG. 4 is a schematic representation of a method of a preferred embodiment for authenticating and authorizing a transaction; and



FIG. 5 is a schematic representation of a method of a preferred embodiment with a plurality of authority devices.





DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The following description of the preferred embodiments of the invention is not intended to limit the invention to these preferred embodiments, but rather to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use this invention.


As shown in FIGS. 1-3, the method of the preferred embodiments for notifying mobile devices to complete transactions includes registering an authority device for an account on an auth platform Silo, receiving a transaction request from an initiator to the auth platform S120, messaging the authority device with the transaction request S130, receiving an authority agent response from the authority device to the auth platform S140, if the authority agent response confirms the transaction, communicating a confirmed transaction to the initiator S150, and if the authority agent response denies the transaction, communicating a denied transaction to the initiator S152. The method functions to use push-based challenges on mobile device for the authentication and/or authorization of parties involved in a transaction. The method functions to utilize non-intrusive techniques while providing improved security. The pushed messages preferably alert a user to the transaction request in real-time such that a decision of confirmation or denial of a transaction can be communicated to a requesting party with minimal time lag (e.g., preferably less than a minute, and more preferably less than 10 seconds). The method may be employed as standalone transaction validation or incorporated into a multifactor system. The method may be used in application such as web-based applications, remote access credentials, privileged account management, financial transactions, password recovery/reset mechanisms, physical access control, Automatic Teller Machine (ATM) withdrawals, domain name transfers, online or offline transactions, building access security, or any suitable application requiring authentication and/or authorization.


The method is preferably performed by an auth platform that communicates with a client of an initiating agent and an authority device associated with an account of the auth platform. The auth platform is preferably an internet accessible server that may be hosted on a distributed computing system, but may be hosted on any suitable platform. The initiating agent is typically a user or process that initiates a transaction. The requested transaction is preferably initiated by the initiating agent through a client such as a website, application, or device (e.g., an ATM machine). For authentication, the initiator agent may be a legitimate party or a malicious party attempting to fraudulently impersonate the legitimate party. For authorization, the initiating agent may be a legitimate authenticated party but may require approval from other parties to perform the action of the transaction. The authority device is preferably a device associated with an authentic agent that is a user or process that is legitimately authenticated or authorized to execute transactions. Even if a malicious entity were attempting to impersonate a user or authentic agent through stolen credentials or other means, they would—ideally—lack the authority device to complete a transaction.


Step S110, which includes registering an authority device for an account on an auth platform, functions to identify a device of an agent that is permitted to authenticate or authorize transactions. The registration preferably occurs prior to a transaction request, and is preferably performed during an initial setup of an account on the auth platform. During the setup authentication and/or authorization rules are preferably set. The authority device is preferably a mobile computing device possessed by an authentic user or an authorized agent. The mobile device is preferably a mobile phone, tablet computer, smartphone, personal data assistant (PDA), personal computer, and/or any suitable computing device. The authority device preferably has access to a network over which communication with the auth platform is performed, such as a WiFi network, local-area network, telephony network, short message service (SMS) network, multimedia messaging service (MMS), or any suitable network. A plurality of devices may additionally be registered, as shown in FIG. 5. A second authority device may provide a backup communication point if a primary authority device does not respond. For example, after attempting to contact a primary authority device, the auth platform may message a secondary authority device for authentication or authorization. Or, alternatively, a threshold of two confirmations may need to be received to authorize a transaction. Additionally, a first authority device may be registered for authenticating the identity of an agent of the transaction request, and a second authority device may be registered for authorizing an action of an agent such that authentication and authorization may both be enabled, as shown in FIG. 4.


Step S120, which includes receiving a transaction request from an initiator to the auth platform, functions to initiate a transaction. The transaction is preferably any event, transfer, action, or activity that requires authentication and/or authorization of an involved party. Exemplary transactions may include logging into a website, application or computer system; a user withdrawing money from an ATM; a user initiating a “forgotten password” procedure; a user attempting to enter a restricted area of a building or environment; a payment exchange between two entities; a user attempting to perform a restricted action in a computer system; and/or any suitable application requiring authentication and/or authorization. Authentication preferably includes validating the identity of at least one involved party relevant to a transaction. Authorization preferably includes validating authority or permission of an entity to execute a transaction. For authentication, the authority device preferably belongs to the authentic user for self-approval of transactions. For authorization, the authority device preferably belongs to an authoritative user that is preferably in charge of regulating transactions of a user involved in the transaction. The transactions are preferably initiated in an online environment, where parties may be communicating using a computing device or public/private network, but the transactions may alternatively occur offline where parties may be interacting in the real world. The user or device initiating the transaction is ideally a legitimate party, as shown in FIG. 1, but in the situations where a malicious party initiates or participates in the transaction, the method is preferably able to properly identify such a situation, as shown in FIG. 2. After a malicious transaction is prevented the approval rules for a transaction may be dynamically altered to increase security. The transaction is preferably sent from a requesting entity such as a website, application, or device. The requesting entity is typically a system in communication with the auth platform. An application programming interface (API) or any suitable protocol is preferably used to communicate between the requesting entity and the auth platform. In one variation, the communication sent from the requester is encrypted and the authority device preferably decrypts the information. This variation preferably prevents the auth platform from inspecting or accessing the communicated information which may be applicable when a third party is passing sensitive information through the auth platform. As an alternative variation, the communication between the requester and the auth platform is preferably encrypted or otherwise cryptographically protected and communication between the auth platform and the authority device verifies that the communication is from the authority device. Any suitable steps may be taken to secure the communication between the requesting entity, the auth platform and the authority device.


Step S130, which includes messaging the authority device with the transaction request, functions to push a notification to a secondary device for authentication or authorization. The authority device is preferably a device only the authentic user or an authorized user would possess. The message is preferably sent through a communication channel between the authority device and the auth platform. The communication channel is preferably a push notification service provided through the authority device. The communication channel may alternatively be a short message system SMS network, email, a instant message, an in-app notification system, web based websocket or publication-subscription channels, image based transmission of transaction information such as through QR-codes captured by a camera, or any suitable technique for messaging the device. The messages preferably appear on the authority device or create an alert in substantially real-time (e.g., in less than 5 minutes). The realtime aspect of the messaging functions to enable authentication and authorization at the time of the transaction. In one variation, tracking a registered authority device may additionally be performed by the auth platform. For example, in a persistent TCP/IP connection model, a mobile device moving from a service provider data network to a WiFi network may change IP addresses and therefore initiate a new persistent connection. Upon receiving that new connection and an identifier of the mobile device, the auth platform preferably updates the state of the device for the account associated with that device. Then, the proper connection is preferably used for messaging the authority device. Some communication channels may have limited throughput and lack the capability to present a full message from the auth platform. For example, SMS messages have a 160 character limit. An initial message may include a unique identifier, which can then be used to retrieve a full message. For example, the SMS message may include a URL link or code which can be used to retrieve a full message from an application or website. The full message may provide additional information and options for a transaction response. The messages transmitted over the communication channel may additionally be cryptographically signed and encrypted using an established setup between the auth device and the auth platform. Additionally the messages preferably include transaction information (i.e., metadata). The transaction information may include account or entity name, transaction details, location and time of transaction, IP address of initiating host, geolocation of the IP address or any suitable information or any suitable data on the transaction. In one example an online bank transfer may have a message with transaction information including payer, payee, account numbers, transfer amount, and transaction date and time.


Step S140, which includes receiving an authority agent response from the authority device to the auth platform, functions to process a response from an authentic user or authorized user. The response preferably confirms or denies a transaction. The confirmation and denial of a transaction may additionally be set to indicate any suitable form of response. Preferably, the initial options are to accept or reject a transaction. Additionally, if a transaction is rejected a reason for rejection may be included such as “canceled because of change of mind” or “possible malevolent transaction”. Other variations may include a variety of options that may change based on the application. The available forms of responses may be included in the message information. Other forms of responses may allow a variety of multiple-choice options, variable setting options, or any suitable form of response input. For example, if a parent is acting as an authorization provider for an ATM withdraws made by a child, a message may be sent to a phone of the parent indicating that the child is attempting to withdraw a particular amount (e.g., $50). The parent may be able to respond allowing a withdrawal of only a lower amount (e.g., $20). As an additional sub-step to receiving an authority agent response, the response is preferably verified to be a legitimate response from the authority device as opposed to an entity imitating the device. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), a Hash-based Message Authentication Code (HMAC), message signing, or any suitable cryptographic protocol may be used to verify the response is from the authority device.


Step S150 and S152, which includes if the authority agent response confirms the transaction, communicating a confirmed transaction to the initiator, and if the authority agent response denies the transaction, communicating a denied transaction to the initiator, function to communicate the authentication and/or authorization to the initiator of the transaction. Any suitable response to a transaction is preferably communicated back to the requesting entity (e.g., a third party website or an ATM machine). The requesting entity can then preferably take appropriate action. If the transaction is confirmed or approved, the transaction proceeds. If the transaction is denied or altered, the requesting entity preferably halts or prevents the transaction. The requesting entity can preferably use the transaction response to modify a transaction state in any suitable manner. Based on the variety of responses from authentic users and/or authorized users, rules may determine when to confirm or deny a transaction. In a variation of the method, there may be a plurality of authority devices registered for authorization and/or authentication. A rule may be setup for which authority devices to message, in what order, and the timing of the messaging. Additionally, rules may be set for received responses. A particular threshold for the number of responses from the plurality of authority devices may be set. For example, four authority devices may be messaged for authorization and at least three must confirm the transaction for it to be confirmed. In another example, a plurality of authority devices for authentication may be registered, and the authority devices are messaged one after the other until at least one responds. The response from an authority agent may alternatively be passed on to the requesting entity with no analysis.


An alternative embodiment preferably implements the above methods in a computer-readable medium storing computer-readable instructions. The instructions are preferably executed by computer-executable components preferably integrated with an auth platform. The auth platform is preferably hosted on a distributed computing system or cloud based platform but may alternatively be hosted in any suitable system. The computer-readable medium may be stored on any suitable computer readable media such as RAMs, ROMs, flash memory, EEPROMs, optical devices (CD or DVD), hard drives, floppy drives, or any suitable device. The computer-executable component is preferably a processor but the instructions may alternatively or additionally be executed by any suitable dedicated hardware device. The auth platform preferably includes an API for third party services and devices to use in initiating transactions and interpreting responses from the auth platform. The platform preferably includes a communication channel such as a public or private network or SMS network to communicate with at least one authority device. The authority device is preferably a mobile phone but may be any suitable personal computing device.


As a person skilled in the art will recognize from the previous detailed description and from the figures and claims, modifications and changes can be made to the preferred embodiments of the invention without departing from the scope of this invention defined in the following claims.

Claims
  • 1. A method of completing a transaction comprising the steps of: registering a user authentication device of an authentic user on a remote auth platform comprising a web server;registering a user authoritative device of an authoritative agent on the remote auth platform;setting a transaction confirmation threshold requiring a confirmation response from the user authentication device of the authentic user and an authorization response from the user authoritative device of the authoritative agent to enable a completion of a transaction request;receiving, at a user interface having Internet accessibility, user login input from a user for initiating the transaction request, wherein the user login input comprises user authentication credentials for performing an initial authentication of the user at the user interface, and wherein the user interface is maintained by a first entity;identifying whether the user comprises the authentic user for the transaction request based on the user login input comprising the user authentication credentials received at the user interface;in response to identifying the user as authenticated based on the user login input, transmitting by the user interface via an application programming interface (API) the transaction request to the remote auth platform that is separate and independent from the user interface and that performs at least a second authentication of the user, wherein the remote auth platform is maintained by a second entity;separately, at the remote auth platform, performing the second authentication of the user by performing the steps of: (i) using the transaction request to identify the user authentication device of the authentic user registered at the remote auth platform;(ii) using the transaction request to identify the user authoritative device of the authoritative agent that is registered at the remote auth platform;(iii) transmitting via a secure push-based communication channel a first push-based challenge to the user authentication device, the first push-based challenge comprising a message including details of the transaction request and a request to confirm or deny the transaction request by submitting one of a user input at the user authentication device to confirm the transaction request or a user input at the user authentication device to deny the transaction request;(iv) receiving from the user authentication device, via the secure push-based communication channel, a response to the push-based challenge comprising the user input to confirm the transaction request or the user input to deny the transaction request;(v) transmitting via a second secure push-based communication channel a second push-based challenge to the user authoritative device, the second push-based challenge comprising a message including details of the transaction request and a request to authorize or deny authorization of the transaction request of the authentic user by submitting one of an authoritative user input at the user authoritative device to authorize the transaction request or an authoritative user input at the user authoritative device to deny authorization of the transaction request;(vi) processing the responses to the first push-based challenge and the second push-based challenge to determine whether the second authentication of the authenticated-user is successful and the transaction request is authorized; andwhen the responses to the first push-based challenge confirms the transaction request and the response to the second push-based challenge authorizes the transaction request thereby satisfying the transaction confirmation threshold, transmitting, via the API, from the remote auth platform an attestation to the first entity that the authentic user of the authentication device confirmed the transaction request,orwhen the response to the first push-based challenge does not confirm the transaction request or when the response to the second push-based challenge denies authorization of the transaction request thereby not satisfying the transaction confirmation threshold, transmitting, via the API, from the remote auth platform an attestation to the first entity that the authentic user of the authentication device or the authoritative user of the authoritative device denied the transaction request.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein when: both (a) the user is identified as being an authenticated user and (b) the second authentication of the authenticated user of the transaction request based on the response to the first push-based challenge comprises the user input to confirm the transaction request, completing the transaction request at the user interface,or(a) the user is identified as being the authenticated user and (b) the second authentication of the authenticated user of the transaction request based on the response to the first push-based challenge comprises the user input to deny the transaction request, denying the transaction request.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first entity maintaining the user interface and transmitting the transaction request to the remote auth platform is different from the second entity comprising a second authentication entity that maintains the remote auth platform.
  • 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the second authentication entity only performs the second authentication of the authenticated user and does not identify the user as being the authenticated user.
  • 5. The method of claim 3, wherein the user authentication device comprises a remote user authentication device that is not maintained by none of the first entity transmitting the transaction request and the second authentication entity.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the attestation to the user interface is transmitted in real-time, wherein the transmission of the attestation to the user interface occurs and is received by the user interface at a time of the transaction.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the remote auth platform comprises the web server hosted on a distributed computing system.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the user interface and the user authentication device are separate and distinct.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein a plurality of user authentication devices are registered at the remote auth platform, and communicating to the user authentication device includes messaging at least two of the plurality of user authentication devices.
  • 10. A system for facilitating a transaction involving a first authentication and a second authentication, the system comprising: a user authentication device an authentic user that is registered on a remote auth platform, the remote auth platform comprising a server;a user authoritative device of an authoritative agent that is registered on the remote auth platform,wherein a transaction confirmation threshold is set that requires a confirmation response from the user authentication device of the authentic user and an authorization response from the user authoritative device of the authoritative agent to enable a completion of a transaction request;a remote user interface, wherein the transaction request is initiated by a user, wherein the first authentication of the user is performed at the remote user interface based on receipt of user login input, wherein the remote user interface is maintained by a first entity, wherein in response to authenticating the user at the remote user interface, transmitting by the user interface, via an application programming interface, the transaction request to the remote auth platform, wherein the remote auth platform is maintained by a second entity different from the first entity;wherein the remote auth platform performs the secondary authentications of the user, wherein performing the secondary authentication of the user includes the steps of: (i) using the transaction request to identify the user authentication device of the authentic user registered at the remote auth platform;(ii) using the transaction request to identify the user authoritative device of the authoritative agent that is registered at the remote auth platform;(iii) transmitting via a secure push-based communication channel a first push-based challenge to the user authentication device, the first push-based challenge comprising a message including details of the transaction request and a request to confirm or deny the transaction request by submitting one of a user input at the user authentication device to confirm the transaction request or a user input at the user authentication device to deny the transaction request;(iv) receiving from the user authentication device, via the secure push-based communication channel, a response to the push-based challenge comprising the user input to confirm the transaction request or the user input to deny the transaction request;(v) transmitting via a second secure push-based communication channel a second push-based challenge to the user authoritative device, the second push-based challenge comprising a message including details of the transaction request and a request to authorize or deny authorization of the transaction request of the authentic user by submitting one of an authoritative user input at the user authoritative device to authorize the transaction request or an authoritative user input at the user authoritative device to deny authorization of the transaction request;(vi) processing the response to the first push-based challenge and the second push-based challenge to determine whether the second authentication of the user is successful and the transaction request is authorized; andwhen the responses to the first push-based challenge confirms the transaction request and the response to the second push-based challenge authorizes the transaction request thereby satisfying the transaction confirmation threshold, transmitting, via the API, from the remote auth platform an attestation to the first entity that the authentic user of the authentication device confirmed the transaction request,orwhen the response to the first push-based challenge does not confirm the transaction request or when the response to the second push-based challenge denies authorization of the transaction request thereby not satisfying the transaction confirmation threshold, transmitting, via the API, from the remote auth platform an attestation to the first entity that the authentic user of the authentication device or the authoritative user of the authoritative device denied the transaction request.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/039,209, filed 2 Mar. 2011 which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/309,885, filed 3 Mar. 2010, both of which are incorporated in their entireties by this reference.

US Referenced Citations (206)
Number Name Date Kind
5838792 Ganesan Nov 1998 A
5870723 Pare et al. Feb 1999 A
6119096 Mann et al. Sep 2000 A
6209091 Sudia et al. Mar 2001 B1
6694025 Epstein et al. Feb 2004 B1
6758394 Maskatiya et al. Jul 2004 B2
6823359 Heidingsfeld et al. Nov 2004 B1
6934858 Woodhill Aug 2005 B2
6956950 Kausik Oct 2005 B2
6996716 Hsu Feb 2006 B1
7080077 Ramamurthy, Sr. et al. Jul 2006 B2
7096354 Wheeler et al. Aug 2006 B2
7331518 Rable Feb 2008 B2
7349929 Pfitzner Mar 2008 B2
7386720 Sandhu et al. Jun 2008 B2
7447784 Eun Nov 2008 B2
7463637 Bou-Diab et al. Dec 2008 B2
7496662 Roesch et al. Feb 2009 B1
7526792 Ross Apr 2009 B2
7562382 Hinton et al. Jul 2009 B2
7574733 Woodhill Aug 2009 B2
7603547 Patrick et al. Oct 2009 B2
7610390 Yared et al. Oct 2009 B2
7711122 Allen et al. May 2010 B2
7721328 Boulos et al. May 2010 B2
7793110 Durfee et al. Sep 2010 B2
7831682 Certain et al. Nov 2010 B2
7904608 Price Mar 2011 B2
7953979 Bomeman et al. May 2011 B2
7982595 Hanna et al. Jul 2011 B2
8028325 Cahill Sep 2011 B2
8028329 Whitcomb Sep 2011 B2
8108253 Poon et al. Jan 2012 B2
8136148 Chayanam et al. Mar 2012 B1
8151317 Hinton et al. Apr 2012 B2
8161527 Curren Apr 2012 B2
8196177 Hinton Jun 2012 B2
8200980 Robinson et al. Jun 2012 B1
8245044 Kang Aug 2012 B2
8275672 Nguyen et al. Sep 2012 B1
8280979 Kunz et al. Oct 2012 B2
8332627 Matthews et al. Dec 2012 B1
8335933 Humphrey et al. Dec 2012 B2
8397301 Hering et al. Mar 2013 B2
8402508 Rouskov et al. Mar 2013 B2
8402526 Ahn Mar 2013 B2
8458335 Holzer Jun 2013 B2
8458798 Williams et al. Jun 2013 B2
8468609 Leggette Jun 2013 B2
8495720 Counterman Jul 2013 B2
8499339 Chao et al. Jul 2013 B2
8510820 Oberheide et al. Aug 2013 B2
8538028 Yeap et al. Sep 2013 B2
8539567 Logue et al. Sep 2013 B1
8544068 Yates et al. Sep 2013 B2
8549601 Ganesan Oct 2013 B2
8595809 Chayanam Nov 2013 B2
8627438 Bhimanaik Jan 2014 B1
8635679 Hardt Jan 2014 B2
8646057 Counterman Feb 2014 B2
8646060 Ben Ayed Feb 2014 B1
8646086 Chakra et al. Feb 2014 B2
8667578 Ladki et al. Mar 2014 B2
8689287 Bohmer et al. Apr 2014 B2
8700729 Dua Apr 2014 B2
8707409 Shah et al. Apr 2014 B2
8732019 Brown et al. May 2014 B2
8732475 Fahrny et al. May 2014 B2
8732839 Hohl May 2014 B2
8745703 Lambert et al. Jun 2014 B2
8763077 Oberheide et al. Jun 2014 B2
8806609 Gladstone et al. Aug 2014 B2
2639997 Wiesmaier et al. Sep 2014 A1
8850516 Hrebicek et al. Sep 2014 B1
8891772 D'Souza et al. Nov 2014 B2
8893230 Oberheide et al. Nov 2014 B2
8898762 Kang Nov 2014 B2
9032069 Van Biljon et al. May 2015 B2
9049011 Agrawal Jun 2015 B1
9055107 Medvinsky et al. Jun 2015 B2
9069947 Kottahachchi et al. Jun 2015 B2
9209978 Besehanic Dec 2015 B2
9223961 Sokolov Dec 2015 B1
9270663 Kravitz et al. Feb 2016 B2
9282085 Oberheide et al. Mar 2016 B2
9361468 Peddada Jun 2016 B2
9401918 Lu et al. Jul 2016 B2
9418213 Roth et al. Aug 2016 B1
9495533 Yiu et al. Nov 2016 B2
9497184 Fork et al. Nov 2016 B2
9607142 Dharmarajan et al. Mar 2017 B2
9736153 McDaniel et al. Aug 2017 B2
20020123967 Wang Sep 2002 A1
20020131404 Mehta et al. Sep 2002 A1
20030115452 Sandhu et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030120931 Hopkins et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030126472 Banzhof Jul 2003 A1
20030147536 Andivahis et al. Aug 2003 A1
20040064706 Lin et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040139318 Fiala et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040218763 Rose et al. Nov 2004 A1
20050097352 Patrick et al. May 2005 A1
20050218215 Lauden Oct 2005 A1
20050221268 Chaar et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050240522 Kranzley et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050268107 Harris et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060021018 Hinton et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060130139 Sobel et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060165060 Dua Jul 2006 A1
20060182276 Sandhu et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060184788 Sandhu et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060242692 Thione et al. Oct 2006 A1
20070016948 Dubrovsky et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070081667 Hwang Apr 2007 A1
20070101145 Sachdeva et al. May 2007 A1
20070199060 Touboul Aug 2007 A1
20070228148 Rable Oct 2007 A1
20070250914 Fazal Oct 2007 A1
20070254631 Spooner Nov 2007 A1
20070258594 Sandhu et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070284429 Beeman Dec 2007 A1
20070297607 Ogura et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080049642 Gudipudi et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080069347 Brown et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080120411 Eberle May 2008 A1
20080229104 Ju et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080301669 Rao et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090055906 Wendorff Feb 2009 A1
20090077060 Sermersheim et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090083225 Jacobs et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090167489 Nan et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090187986 Ozeki Jul 2009 A1
20090210705 Chen Aug 2009 A1
20090259848 Williams Oct 2009 A1
20090300596 Tyhurst et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090300707 Garimella et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100023781 Nakamoto Jan 2010 A1
20100042954 Rosenblatt et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100069104 Neil et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100107225 Spencer et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100114740 Dominguez et al. May 2010 A1
20100115578 Nice et al. May 2010 A1
20100121767 Coulter et al. May 2010 A1
20100125737 Kang May 2010 A1
20100131755 Zhu et al. May 2010 A1
20100180001 Hardt Jul 2010 A1
20100202609 Sandhu et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100216425 Smith Aug 2010 A1
20100217986 Schneider Aug 2010 A1
20100233996 Herz et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100257610 Hohl Oct 2010 A1
20100263021 Arnott et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100319068 Abbadessa et al. Dec 2010 A1
20100330969 Kim et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110026716 Tang et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110086616 Brand et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110107389 Chakarapani May 2011 A1
20110119765 Hering et al. May 2011 A1
20110138469 Ye et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110197267 Gravel et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110219449 St Neitzel et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110277025 Counterman Nov 2011 A1
20110302410 Clarke et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110302630 Nair et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120063601 Hart Mar 2012 A1
20120090028 Lapsley et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120096274 Campagna et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120198050 Maki et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120198228 Oberheide et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120216239 Yadav et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120227098 Obasanjo et al. Sep 2012 A1
20120278454 Stewart et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120290841 Jentzsch Nov 2012 A1
20120300931 Ollikainen et al. Nov 2012 A1
20130042002 Cheeniyil et al. Feb 2013 A1
20130060708 Oskolkov et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130081101 Baer et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130097585 Jentsch et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130110676 Kobres May 2013 A1
20130117826 Gordon et al. May 2013 A1
20130124292 Juthani May 2013 A1
20130125226 Shah et al. May 2013 A1
20130174246 Schrecker et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130179681 Benson et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130239167 Sreenivas et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130239168 Sreenivas et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130239177 Sigurdson et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130310006 Chen et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130326224 Yavuz Dec 2013 A1
20130326493 Poonamalli et al. Dec 2013 A1
20140047546 Sidagni Feb 2014 A1
20140188796 Fushman et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140201841 Deshpande et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140208405 Hashai Jul 2014 A1
20140235230 Raleigh Aug 2014 A1
20140237236 Kalinichenko et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140244993 Chew Aug 2014 A1
20140245278 Zellen Aug 2014 A1
20140245396 Oberheide et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140247140 Proud Sep 2014 A1
20140351954 Brownell et al. Nov 2014 A1
20150012914 Klein et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150026461 Devi Jan 2015 A1
20150242643 Hankins et al. Aug 2015 A1
20160286391 Khan Sep 2016 A1
20160366589 Jean Dec 2016 A1
Non-Patent Literature Citations (9)
Entry
F. Aloul, S. Zahidi and W. El-Hajj, “Two factor authentication using mobile phones,” 2009 IEEE/ACS International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications, Rabat, 2009, pp. 641-644.
Kher, Vishal, and Yongdae Kim. “Securing distributed storage: challenges, techniques, and systems.” Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Storage security and survivability. ACM, 2005, pp. 9-25.
Bonneau, Joseph, et al. “Passwords and the evolution of imperfect authentication.” Communications of the ACM 58.7 (2015): 78-87.
Edge, Kenneth, et al. “The use of attack and protection trees to analyze security for an online banking system.” System Sciences, 2007. HICSS 2007. 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on. IEEE, 2007.
Goldfeder et al., Securing Bitcoin wallets via a new DSA/ECDSA threshold signature scheme, http://www.cs.princeton.edu/˜stevenag/threshold_sigs.pdf.
Nieuenhofen, Kay, and Mathew Thompson. “A secure marketplace for mobile Java agents.” Proceeding of the second international Conference on Autonomous agents. ACM, 1998. (pp. 212-218).
Simske et al., “APEX: Automated Policy Enforcement eXchange”, Sep. 21-24, 2010, ACM, pp. 139-142.
Symantec, Administration guide for symantec Endpoint protection and symantec network access control, 2009, version 11.00.05.00.00.
Symantec, Administration Guide for Symantec TM Endpoint Protection and Symantec Network Access Control, Aug. 1, 2007.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20170078280 A1 Mar 2017 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61309885 Mar 2010 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 13039209 Mar 2011 US
Child 15363468 US